Bigger Global Banks? Too Big To Fail? Right....

[WhiskeyGirl]

An expert on German economic history, Professor James argues that it's only going to be the very biggest and strongest states, such as the US and China, that will be able to have very big, global banks.

As a result of the financial crisis, such financial institutions now enjoy implicit guarantees from taxpayers' and only large countries will be able to provide that. He also argued that much encouragement should be taken at how China has responded to the financial crisis.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/8439907/What-Soros-and-Rogoff-are-saying-Bretton-Woods-2011.html

Taxpayers have to pay the gambling losses, who enjoys the profits?   Trillions made from questionable products and practices?

[WhiskeyGirl]

He was sceptical, too, of those who put too much faith in regulation, while conceding that it was clear regulation was needed. It was refreshing to hear someone who had been in the thick of policymaking acknowledge a problem others have pointed to: that when it came to stuff like financial regulation, there was "basically no one" who is both knowledgeable enough about what is sought to be regulated and is not, in some way, co-opted. Which made his touching faith in Dodd-Frank, which he defended stoutly, a bit less than convincing.

read more here - http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2011/04/economics_0

Why not let all these financial gamblers gamble with their own money?  NO MORE DISCOUNT WINDOW BORROWING.  Use and lose your own money.

Maybe if they were gambling with money from their own pockets, they would have been more careful?

Has Dodd-Frank fixed this gambling problem?  Or made it worse?

Sure we'll let you gamble with taxpayer money, we'll just make a few more rules you can circumvent...

just my humble opinions